Estwing or a Junglas!

Estwing also has some "tactical" style 'hawks, or if that and the regular hatchets and camp axes don't do it for ya...



the Leather Carpenter's Hatchet, which their website shows with both the leather handle as pictured, or a rubber insulated version.

Link

As noted, if you don't like the shape, a relatively little effort can fix that, and Estwing tools are both Made in the USA and (in my limited experience; I only have their Sportsman's Axe, the basic leather-wrap hatchet and it was a gift) reasonably affordable. Haven't used it for anything "hardcore" though.

First post nails it.

I have a SOG and it's been used and abused. A quick filing and it's sharp as ever.

Love it!

There's a difference that's being ignored in the shape and usefulness of a tomahawk.

First, fixed integral handle or polled - the replaceable slip in kind. A fixed integral is much stronger with almost no chance of breaking. A slip in handle can be counted on to break, and making a handle a easy skill that will be exercised over the years. If materials are at hand. Urban and desert might not easily accommodate that.

Another issue with the slip in handle is that it protrudes from the top of the hawk. That means it's not going to be easy using it for rolling head operations like prying - even if it has a spike. The knob sticking out needs to be dressed and wedged, just like a hammer, to use it the same as pulling a nail. That's where the traditional hawks start getting separated from the tactical hawks. One is for woodcraft in the field, the other for deconstruction in any environment.

A traditional hawk could be called upon to loosen the ground with the bit, and then turned sideways to shovel; the tactical hawk with spike would not have the bit dulled, but the spike used, and the wider end would shovel more dirt.

It's important to see that difference - a traditional polled hawk can't do what a tactical hawk does better. It's not a moral hierarchy or something related to masculinity at all, it's just the difference between the two tools. An entrenching tool with spike would certainly be better at digging than a tac hawk, not so much chopping, tho.

That's where the line in the sand has been drawn in the last five years - the RMJ Shrike helped define it. A tactical hawk is integral with spike,  a woodcraft hawk traditionally has a slip in handle, maybe no spike or hammer at all. Those two difference make them different tools, just a a 6" fixed blade isn't the same as a scout knife. You can do a lot with both, nearly the same in some cases if the skill exists, but it's far easier to open a can with the opener than with a fixed blade. Tools are made to do specific things, and when that is optimized, one is better for a job than another.

If i were tearing out lathe and plaster, I would prefer the tac hawk to a hatchet, but a boys camp axe and a Dasco bar worked better. Stanley FUBAR, too big and heavy.

Size, weight, and shape have significant impacts on whether the tool is right for the specific job.

So, what are the criteria for a SHTF tomahawk? You are going to carry it on you just like a AR15 in combat, all day every day and sleep with it. An oversized, overweight camp axe isn't going to do the best job. Carrying a pry bar, hatchet, pick, and shovel, not a good idea. But a tac hawk can do that because it won't get left behind, bartered, or stuffed in the back of a vehicle that had to be abandoned for lack of fuel.

It's really no different that what happened to all those huge Bowie's pictured in the go to war photos from the Civil War. They eventually got replaced by a four inch clasp knife that could do 85% of the same work - all the time, because it was carried. The Bowie, no, it wound up at the bottom of the pack, just the same as the oversized stuff a lot of guys packed into SW Asia. You can only carry so much weight, and you only carry what you find useful.

There are quite a few out there that cover both traditional and new age tactical designs, in all price ranges. Like, the Condor from a plant in Central America, full rolled tube handle, sharpened beard, spike, and affordable if a $300+ hawk for deployment doesn't meet the budget guidelines. If you don't need a Mercedes, then commute in what you can that fits the needs. You have to know what you specifically need first to make a decision, tho.

Chop? Dig? Pry? Rip? Be unbreakable? Resistant to chemical attack, rot, or harbor noxious agents (paracord is out right there.)? Electrically insulated? What conditions exist for you on a quiet weekend campout aren't the same as someone hiking out of Manhattan.

Hopefully, more companies will step up with affordable, mass produced one piece tomahawks.

The Estwing seems very solid but I don't like the design of the bit or the spike. Something with a shape like the Cold Steel spike hawk, built like the Estwing would be ideal.

Modify?  Pictures Please.

You said modding ?

here is a link to blade forums for "modding the CS trail hawk."

http://www.bladeforums.com/forums/showthread.php/483042-Mod-ing-The-CS-Trail-Hawk

The more I look at them, I am now seriously considering a RMJ Berserker. However, I realize that I would probably never really use it. However, it would be there in the event of a zpocalyps.





       
 

Great googily moogily $550 for a tomahawk.....

Honestly I would be concerned about using it, I mean really using it. These are tools not fashion statements. No offensive intended I just don't see the point in it as a go to item. If you plan on using it is SHTF you need to test your stuff out to make sure it will endure.

If you had said you wanted a great looking hawk as a conversation piece I could see looking at the more expensive items.

I completely agree with you. Was just so purdy I had to share.

 

While I dont think I will ever spend that much money on a hawk the RMJ stuff is made to use hard so no fear there.

Check this out

Military Tactical Spike Axe - a semi-modern version
     of the 18th Century spike hawk. The rear blade/spike has a high carbon insert forge welded into it, just
like the main blade of the axe.  The wide portion of the "spike" is
sharpened for cutting, while the tip is flattened somewhat for prying or
digging.  







Hand forged

or check out 2hawks

I have a friend who does steel targets and has access to a metal shop and cnc cutting table. I am wondering if I can just find a sheet of decent steel and have him zip a few out. Add paracord handles and for the edge to finish.

I just have no idea on what kind of metal to use

Stickman, I hate you. Just when I think I am over my gear porn addition, you go and get me hooked again. I bet you could make some epic "Toes and Guns" pics.



 

I really like the simplicity of that. My only worry would be the weakness of the wood handle. While it would probably last anything I put it through, it would ultimately be the week point. I guess if I had the wood working skills I could remedy that if need be though. Still, I like it.



 

One of the things that gets mixed up in the discussion of 'hawks is what they do. And that directly relates to size.

A three pound axe chops trees, a hatchet will limb it out. Smaller than that,  a hawk can do some of that, too - just like a 4" fixed blade could be used like a machete. Some, but not so much. To me, that's where the comparisons to a Grandfors Bruks is a bit off base. Much the same as saying a cordless Sawzall and Stihl chainsaw could do the same work. Same class of tool, yes. Not the same tool at all. Nope.

So, for those who mock the tomahawk and suggest a man's axe would be a better tool, I have to ask, who's being the tool? There's a difference, same as the difference between a double bit axe and a shingle hatchet. Neither is a tomahawk. They aren't interchangeable and aren't meant to be.

And, watch out for that spike!? Ok, sure, just like I watch out for the claws on my Estwing hammer. Haven't hit my forehead yet. Swing the tool from the side where your arm is, you won't hit yourself.

The spike tomahawk fits about in the middle of a spectrum that ranges from a big axe way over on one side, to the hawk, then proceeding thru other tools like, a Collins Pick Mattock, and beyond. This is where that "Get a mans axe!" falls apart again - it doesn't grub phone wires out of the ground real well, or dig up roots to eat, etc. Vent an metal container? The axe would be a bludgeon for that job, a Camp Knife might with a well practiced jab, but a hawk would do it easy. And not dull the main blade either. Versatility works.

Same for a lot of jobs - do you carry an axe, crowbar, or shovel? With a tactical hawk, you carry just the one tool with 1/3 the weight at the most, usually less. And that goes to dead weight - soldiers and hikers don't tolerate it. Campers, sure, throw it in the back of whatever you are spending gas money to haul out to the campsite. I don't read of too many hiking 15 miles back with their axe tho. A saw, yes. In the day, it was a small hatchet. Before that, a hawk.

Then there's the well discussed task of making firewood - by batoning a large blade that is really too big for use in fixing supper. Rather than dull your only knife, plus force it to be large enough to resist the abuse, why not leave it a more practical 4-6 inches max, and split up the wood more quickly with a hawk? That is EXACTLY why it was carried in the day - a large steel blade was hard to fashion and expensive, the hawk much easier and didn't require cutlery steel. Simple medium carbon steel with a good convex edge did the job.

For all around use in daily carry in the field, a hawk with spike would be more useful than an axe, crowbar, hoe, and since construction with nails is moot out under the stars, a hammer head is pretty useless. It's a house building tool, not a woodcraft or field tool.

So, if you are lookiing to a hawk to use in the field, consider: no, it's not an axe for felling trees, but i can chop. It's not a pick for tearing up and turning ground, but it has one. It's not a long handle shovel for digging, but it can move dirt when needed. It's not a long crowbar for demolition, but it can pry things apart. It's none of the bigger tools that are a dedicated design, it's a smaller compromise that can do all those jobs to some degree, which is more than could be said about any one of them.

I see it as being a lot closer to a khukri in more respects than different. Considering the tools ancestry and who used them for what purposes, it has the full recommendation of an indigeneous people who saw either as an effective multipurpose tool for their environment. That modern peoples have demeaned it to the point it's just a throwing toy isn't justification for thinking that's all it can do.

tirod, where in your world does a $300 hawk fit?  Put another way, how does price fit into your argument?

I think he's arguing more the utilitarian value of a 'hawk versus other ax shaped objects.

Monetary value is up to the manufacturer and purchaser  (or the invisible hand) to decide.

I have a 30$ trailhawk that can do just about everything that a 300$ hawk can do.  Aesthetically, it might be lacking though. Function-wise, however, on par or better.

Cost/benefits ratio.

You can get spendy with tools, I have some money I put into blades. Then, I sold them and it financed 1/2 the cost of an AR build. Made money on them, too, or at least didn't lose any. Not bad considering I sold them used and they still brought more than brand new.

Still, they were expensive in comparison to what they could do. The ugly truth is spending 3X on a tool doesn't mean you get 3X the performance or utiilty. Buying cheap doesn't mean you get your money's worth, either. You can go wrong both ways - what you sink into a pricey showcase item means you don't spend money on something else. How much do you have, vs need? is always a question. If you have a spouse, you are intimately aware of that continuing conversation. Two living together are always bartering priorities. You take out in trade whatever you can.

Best method I can think to fairly and honestly evaluate a purchase is cost/benefits. In the range of what is offered in tomahawks, we have pricing from $30 to $300. The lower end has some good tool makers, and some impulse machismo marketers. You avoid the dogs by being specific about what you need (not want) the tool to do. At the upper end, you have some great examples of the leading edge designs using time tested construction methods in new materials, and you have others that are art priced to make money, too.

There is no material benefit to art, and much the same to using high tech materials and construction methods that are far beyond the use you plan. Pretty much the same discussion that's been going on for years, do you need an engraved and scrimmed knife you could also use as a rock climbing pitot? If the intent is to cut potatoes in camp, maybe the rest of the money could go toward a tent and sleeping bag. A Rolex Submariner is a nice dive watch, but buy a Seiko 007 or Orange Monster, and the change could purchase a complete set of tanks, gear, and the friggin ticket to the Bahamas round trip.

There are some simple rules about this size and class of tool, decent carbon steel meets the standard, move higher in the alloy content and you quickly get diminshing returns because more of the cost is in fabrication and tooling. Not materials - that is incremental. The piece of steel might be $4 for a 1095 hawk, and $20 for S30V, but to shape and edge it, the high alloy stuff takes 3X the abrasives and labor. That does not make the tool 3X more effective, or the edge last 3X longer. It will help some, but you are still beating wood fibers and forcing them to separate, it's  really a matter of correct design and shape more than how expensive the steel was.

That means, short version, the $40-75 hawks are likely the best value for the dollars. Above that, it's mostly intellectual comfort; you bought what is reputedly a reliable piece of gear because of the design and technical specifications. Below that, you got something cheap and easily replaceable when it breaks. In the price range, right now you get one piece hawks that don't need field replaceable handles. Not that you could find nice wood in the desert, arctic, or aboard water craft  Goes to that list you put together of what it needs to do. If slip handles made it thru, fine. Some don't have the time to bother, they need it now, not after it gets repaired. Better to not need to repair it, ever.

That's why field craft experts prefer fixed to folder in knives. Folders can and will fail. A tool failure means your life maintaining skills are impaired and you are challenged with survival. That impedes what you really planned on doing, a mission or a vacation gets turned into somber life and death issues. "Last chance Gas 400 miles." Don't fail to fill up. Now. Nope, not Radiator Springs, take the Alaskan Highway. Read up on what is required. About the same gear as a Canadian bush pilot.

That doesn't mean I don't appreciate the specs and looks of something like the RMJ Shrike. For the money, tho, I could buy five Condor TRT's. I don't need more than one, therefore the other $240 could go to something more important, like good wet weather gear, new boots, and/or a decent red dot scope for the firearm. All togeher, much better kit in the freezing rain deer hunting, than sitting soaking wet with an expensive hawk. I think my ego can take the hit if I'm warm and alive.

That's the problem with most gear forums - we tend to escalate our acquisitions because our self image gets wrapped up in a public display. Then the social pecking order starts up, and somebody who says I Have One Of These pulls your chain and you want to respond in a way to settle who's better. It's the continual locker room measuring contest guys are always playing, which really has nothing to do with what they really need in tools or gear. It's why some buy all kinds of exotic looking stuff, or even more so, the mundane - to impress others they are more knowledgeable and have it together.

Some just write long posts, too.

http://www.knifeworks.com/sandwextractionandevasiontomahawk.aspx

How does this one look for an affordable one?
Looks like Taiwan made.  Carbon steel and heavier than some.  
I am intrigued by tomahawks now and will have to pick one up to play around and see if its useful to me.

Kraton = rubbery grip. The longer term prospects are less good than a hard resin/polymer. Most grips on impact tools are hard, strangely enough. The Collins pick mattock I bought as some kind of rubber inlay which gives a lot of grip - but impedes letting one hand slip down when really striking hard.

I don't see too many wrapping grip tape on axes, picks, sledges, etc. We see to get plenty of grip, if needed, I wear gloves first. I don't make the handle more grippy. If anything, I slick it up to cut down hot spots and and cast seams in them. How that kraton moves around and lets the core steel work against your hand would be something to consider. Might be a good project to rehandle in canvas micarta, the overall shape looks useful to me.

S&W does not mean the factory engineers worked over the design - it's a Brand name used by off shore makers who can provide items to sell under the banner.

Bought one, don't like the balance. Not enough mass at the head, too much in the handle IMO. Good deal for the price though.

Great!  Thanks for the info - I had no experience to gauge that by.

Don't overlook that a tomahawk is supposed to be light. Balance is important, but bulking up the head to the point it's just a short axe makes it that. And if you plan on using it as a rolling head pry bar, the way a tactical hawk can be used, then it needs strength in the handle for the leverage you will exert on it. If it's all chopping, then a cast eye head and wood handle is all you need. Prying, hacking, pulling, pounding etc, will be something different, why the one piece design was the point.

It's a different design with other uses that do compromise the chopping ability, but it doesn't mean it can't be done. Chopping is just one of the things a tac hawk does, and not it's main priority. If that is all it was meant to be, then take a good axe. But an axe won't pry, won't be light weight, and certainly won't be short and handy. It's a bit off base to suggest a tac hawk won't cut wood like a full sized axe. A 4" tactical folder won't clear heavy tropical vegetation like a machete, either.

Tac hawks don't cut down trees, but they are likely handier to pry open a hollow metal door to get inside for shelter. And a lot more quietly than pounding on one with a 3 pound axe. A tac hawk could grapple a pack or item out of reach, where the axe has too shallow a angle on the beard of the bit. Axes don't hook well.  A tac hawk could be used to drag someone or something to safety, where an axe would be less capable. And in climbing, a tac hawk is far superior to an axe - it is much more like an ice "axe" than a Grandfors Bruk chopper.

Start thinking of a tac hawk in the role of deconstruction tool, or outdoor technical tool for fieldcraft, and it's not all about being Paul Bunyan. It's a camp axe, Stanley FUBAR, ice axe, and pick mattock rolled into one, and light enough to take with you even loaded down with enough outdoor gear to be out a week. If the camp knife guys don't need to chop down trees to survive, a hawk user won't be any worse off.

This thread made me move the t-hawk up my short list. I wanted a Dead On Annihilator wreaking bar as a SHTF tool, but its nice to have options!

Is there a decent full tang t-hawk in the $40-75 range? Tirod?

Swamp Rat KDSH.

"Search engine" images will bring up a dozen, some actually useful not made for Goth reenactments or for set decorating a Zombie Slayer indie film.